Question Number: 31734

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 8/26/2017

RE: Rec Under 19

Peter of Ottawa, Canda asks...

I had an odd occurrence during a game this week. A defender performed a slide tackle several feet in front of both the ball with no attempt at the ball to force the attacker to change course off the touch line and run around the stretched out defender lying in the grass.
I did not make a call and ended up not having to as watching for advantage the attacker made a good move and ended up getting a free run down the sideline.
On reflection I am wondering what if any foul this is. My initial thought was that his would be impeding without contact but while the defender was not near the ball the attacker was and the Lotg say specifically both. Would this be unsporting behaviour if repeated or is it in fact not a foul at all. What if the attacker had just run forward and tripped over the prone player? I figure this is not an acceptable strategy as I have never seen it before.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Peter
As described this could be either impeding or playing in a dangerous manner which are both offences punished by an indirect free kick. It could also be considered jumping at an opponent depending on how it was executed. The referee can also decide that if the action of the player is reckless then that can be deemed to be unsporting behaviour and a caution. Here is an example
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gZJn4UgpjY4
There was no contact yet it was deemed to be playing in a dangerous manner and reckless which resulted in a caution.

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Peter,
The Laws say that the referee should look beyond the letter of the law and consider 'the spirit of the game' (and of the Laws) in making a decision. Even though as you say, it doesn't seem to meet the literal criteria for impeding which say the ball must not be within playing distance of either player, I think we are all aware that there are times when the Laws are not sufficiently well written to cover all the various different situations that can arise and for me this can still be seen as impeding within the spirit of the law (IMHO). I also agree with you that it could be seen as unsporting behaviour.

If the player had run forward and tripped over the prone player then it becomes a lot easier, it would just be a straightforward tripping foul.

In the situation as you describe it, you were right to apply the advantage.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Peter,
the PIADM or impeding for an INDFK offence has merit but then possibly attempt to trip & JUMPS at an opponent could also be considered. Based on what occurred I think advantage play on with a warning that it could be determined as USB or reckless. I had a young lad leave his feet and jump backwards into an opponent who sidestepped around him to avoid contact. I played advantage then later cautioned the unsafe action at the next stoppage. His saying I did not even touch him did not dissuade my conviction that it was two footed jump at or into an opponent that only missed because the opponent took evasive action.
Cheers